Comparison of Software Development Productivity by EJB Versions with
Enterprise of Standardization
1
Gui Jung Kim,
2Myeong Ho Lee,
1, First AuthorDept. of Biomedical Eng., Konyang University,
[email protected]
2, Corresponding Author
Dept. of eCommerce, Semyung University, [email protected]
Abstract
This paper proposes an object-oriented software development guidance and an evaluation index for the productivity related to EJB(Enterprise JavaBeans). EJB is a known successful standard model for LSDO(Large Size Distributed Object). However, there is no comparison research about the performance of EJB 2.0 and 3.0 with same identical platform. Quantitative analysis is supported as a part of LoC(Line of Code) analysis. There is a limit to develop the updated software with no the specific evaluating index for the productivity of the software. This work proposes a specific index for evaluating the productivity of new version EJB on a platform. Base on the result, the specific guidance of the developing software is obtained.
Keywords
: Evaluation Index, Distributed Object, LoC, EJB 2.0, EJB 3.01. Introduction
In the generation of digital convergence, most systems/processes are being integrated via various methods: operating system via on-demand methods; infrastructure via grid and/or utility; development via IDE (Integrated Development and Environment); database via data hubs and/or EAI; user interface via X-internet; and process integration/standardization via BMP[1].
In such enterprise environment, distributed object architecture is required to reduce the load by distributing programs across computers models, and thus minimizing the system performance drop as well as network bottleneck. In addition, in ubiquitous and cloud computing environments, which require complex systems to be implemented quickly, the ‘Component based Development Method’ is has been emerged through various development of ‘Object Oriented’ and/or ‘Distributed Object Development Methodology’[6].
The component refers to an independent unit, which performs a unique function, of software and as well as a methodology to improve reusability of software by establishing the independence between the component provider and the user through encapsulation, by the separation of interface and implementation. The component model, which includes but not limited to component packaging, distributed transaction management, communication, and security services, supports consistent component management through standard regulation at the stage of the component design and implementation. Despite of various developments, such as CORBA, DCOM, and RMI, to operate distributed application programs of such component model, there has been no standardized methodology to express consistent data. Furthermore, a dedicated programs were required to develop for services such as transaction, security, and multi-threading. Among the widely known standards of the component models to overcome the limitations, such as MS COM+, OMG CCM, and Sun EJB, EJB is the most recognized as successful model for big data distributed objects. EJB is not a run-alone program, like JAVA, but needs to be installed with another software called EJB Container, which is included in EJB server. However, there has been insufficient research comparing the software productivity of EJB 2.0 and EJB 3.0 in the same platform. In addition, quantitative analysis has been carried out only for a portion of LoC, resulting a limitation of specific performance index and guidelines, and thus restricting the evaluation of software productivity and the attempts for new projects[7].
The purpose of this study is to suggest quantitative performance index for the specifications of EJB 2.0 and EJB 3.0 in the same platform, as EJB is the most successful model of big data distributed objects, to quantitatively analyze the specifications of new EJB in order to provide a guideline for objective study of software development productivity.
2. T
2.1.
E App core 1.0 anno deve exhi I deve and/ gene E to al proc App the in th deve2.2.
T imp struc mes of t appl achi appl I with in FThe basic co
. The definit
EJB is a com plication of N-e componN-ents have been o ouncement of elopment from ibited sufficien n 2006, EJB elopment thro /or containers eration[4][8-1 EJB therefore llow developm cessing system plication Serve Server Compo he Application elopment of ap. The develo
The Java SE, lement big d cture for the ssaging, namin the componen lications, for ieve flexibilit lications were n this study, th h the N-tier de igure 1 below
oncept of E
tion and cha
mponent struc -tier. SUN de of J2EE platfo overcome and f EJB 2.0 in 2 m the expansi nt functional a 3.0 was intro ough coding ba s, and throu 0]. supplies vario ment of busine ms, such as th er. The EJB C onents. This S n Server. The pplications[5]
opmental En
which is an data business development ng, and the we nt structure of example, thos ty for the c operated from he developme evelopment en w. FigurEJB
aracteristics
cture to devel eveloped the sp form. With thed the compa 2001, EJB has ion of interne aspects for the oduced and be ased on Java o ugh changes ous services th ess application he Transaction Component Mo Server Compo e Server Com .
nvironment
n individual a applications. t of distribut eb, was develo f the 3-tier st se for busines client-server m this structur ental productiv nvironment, w re 1. Architecs of EJB
lop and distri pecifications o e announceme tibility with s started to be et environmen e development ecame a new object POJO, in the entity hat support the
ns by compon n Process Mon odel expanded onent refers to mponents can b application de Therefore the ed application oped. The con tructure, whic ss logics and d
structure. Th e[1-3]. vities of EBJ 2 which was imp
cture of N-Tier
ibute the Dis of EJB 1.0 in
nt of EJB 1.1 CORBA has ecome the sta nt and popular t of large-scale level of EJB which is not y bean to m e expandable A nent units. EJB
nitor, Web se d the JavaBean o the Applicati be combined evelopment en e Java EE pl ns such as th ncept of this st ch is a distrib database proc he web-based 2.0 and EJB 3. plemented with r Distributed O stributed Obje 1998, which b in 2000, the l s been emph andard platfor rity of Java la e business app that enabled subordinate to meet the requ Application Se B can be opera erver, Databas n Component ion Componen with other co nvironment, h latform, whic hose for tran tructure is to h buted system cessing, into a d distributed .0 were compa h the Java EE Object ect-Oriented J became one of limitations of asized. With rm for compon anguage. EJB plications. flexible tests o any framew uirements of erver Compon ated in transac se Server, and Model to sup nt that can be omponents for has limitation ch has the N-nsaction, secu have a subdivi of the indivi another system object struc ared and analy E(J2EE), as sh Java f the EJB the nent B 2.0 and orks the nents, ction d the pport e run r the ns to -tear urity, ision dual m, to cture yzed own
3. M
3.1.
I spec to d the item T com and3.2.
T prod scheMeasures fo
. The Test e
n order to com cifications, the develop a pilot development ms. It Pla W I C Therefore, in o mparison of the comparison o. The design
The database ductivity will ema shown inor compari
environment
mpare/analyze e developmen t program in E productivity Ta tems OS atform WAS DB IDE CASE order to carry e number of f of XML were cning of the d
schema of t be compared Figure 2. Fing the deve
t
e the software ntal environme EJB 2.0 and 3 for each spec
able 1. Environ EJB 2. Windows 7 Ul Java SE 7/Jav JBoss-4.0. Oracle 10g (1 Eclipse Indig IBM Rational
out the quant files, comparis chosen as the
database sch
the pilot sys and analyzed
igure 2. Arch
elopment p
e development ents and datab 3.0 environmen cifications by nment of EJB .0 ltimate K va EE 6 .5GA 10.2.0.4) go (3.7) Rose 7.0 titative evalua son of LoC be indices.
ema
stem to be d with EJB 2.0 hitecture of Daproductivity
t productivity base schemas a nts. Then this utilizing usin 2.0 and EJB 3 E Window Java SE JBos Oracle Eclipse IBM Ra ation of softwa etween the se developed for 0 and EJB 3.0 atabase Schemy
based on EJB as shown in T s program was ng performanc 3.0 EJB 3.0 ws 7 Ultimate K E 7/Java EE 6 ss-4.0.5GA 10g (10.2.0.4) e Indigo (3.7) ational Rose 7.0 are developme ssion bean an r the compar specifications ma B 2.0 and EJB Table 1 were u s used to comp ce index for e ent productivi nd the entity b rison of softw s using a datab B 3.0 used pare each ity, , bean, ware base3.3.
B desi deve4. C
4.1.
T eval sche T imp imp entit. The design
Based on the d ign for quantelopment platf
Comparison
. Compariso
To compare th luation of a so ema structure This showed lementation in lementation in ty bean companing of the c
database sche titative analy forms are shown analysis f
on of the num
he number of f oftware, a pilo shown in Figu that in EJB n EJB 3.0. Fo n EJB 3.0 The ared to EJB 2.lass diagram
ema and the d sis of the so wn in Figure 3
Figure 3. C
Figure 4. C
for the perf
mber of files
files for each s ot system for ure 2 to compa 2.0, 12 sessi or entity bean, erefore, EJB 3 .0. These resul
m
development e oftware produ 3 and Figure 4 Class Diagram Class Diagramformance in
s
specification, EJB 2.0 and are the numbe ion beans we 12 were need 3.0 significant lts are summa nvironment sh uctivity in th 4 m of EJB 2.0 m of EJB 3.0ndex
which is the m 3.0 was imple r of interface f ere needed, w ded for EJB 2.0 tly increases trized in Table
hown above, he EJB 2.0 a
most basic ind emented base files and the c while only 8 0, while only 4 the software p e 2.
the class diag and the EJB
dex of quantita d on the datab class files. were needed 4 were needed productivity of gram 3.0 ative base d for d for f the
Table 2. Comparison of interface and class file
Items EJB 2.0 EJB 3.0
Session Entity Session Entity
MEMBER MemberSB.java MemberSBBean.java MenberSBHome.java MemberBean.java MemberRemote.java MemberRemoteHome.java MemberSB.java MemberSBBean.java MemberEntity.java BOARD BoardSB.java BoardSBBean.java BoardSBHome.java BoardBean.java BoardRemote.java BoardRemoteHome.java BoardSB.java BoardSBBean.java BoardEntity.java RESERV ReservSB.java ReservSBBean.java ReservSBHome.java ReservBean.java ReservRemote.java ReservRemoteHome.java ReservSB.java ReservSBBean.java ReservEntity.java REPLY ReplySB.java ReplySBBean.java ReplySBHome.java ReplyBean.java ReplyRemote.java ReplyRemoteHome.java ReplySB.java ReplySBBean.java ReplyEntity.java Sum 12 12 8 4
4.2. Comparison of LoC
(1) Comparison of LoC of the Session Bean
To compare the number of files for each specification, which is the most basic index of quantitative evaluation of a software, a pilot system for EJB 2.0 and 3.0 was implemented based on the database schema structure shown in Figure 2 to compare the number of interface files and the class files.
This showed that in EJB 2.0, 12 session beans were needed, while only 8 were needed for implementation in EJB 3.0. For entity bean, 12 were needed for EJB 2.0, while only 4 were needed for implementation in EJB 3.0 Therefore, EJB 3.0 significantly increases the software productivity of the entity bean compared to EJB 2.0. These results are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3. LoC Comparison of Session Beans
Items File Name LoC Note
EJB2.0 EJB3.0 EJB2.0 EJB3.0
MEMBER
MemberSB.java MemberSB.java 3 10 EJB2.0 : 51
EJB3.0 : 63
MemberSBBean.java MemberSBBean.java 41 53
MemberSBHome.java - 7 -
BOARD
BoardSB.java BoardSB.java 3 11 EJB2.0 : 50
EJB3.0 : 60
BoardSBBean.java BoardSBBean.java 40 49
BoardSBHome.java - 7 -
RESERV
ReservSB.java ReservSB.java 7 10 EJB2.0 : 73
EJB3.0 : 46
ReservSBBean.java ReservSBBean.java 59 36
ReservSBHome.java - 7 -
REPLY
ReplySB.java ReplySB.java 3 10 EJB2.0 : 53
EJB3.0 : 46
ReplySBBean.java ReplySBBean.java 43 36
ReplySBHome.java - 7 -
(2) Comparison of LoC of the Entity Bean
The most significant improvement of EJB 3.0 from EJB 2.0 is the entity. In EJB 3.0, the home interface and the remote interface, which declare methods for summoning, and therefore comparing the LoC only, EJB 3.0 has 67% less LoC compared to EJB 2.0, as shown in Table 4.
As there is no need for implementation of the remote interface and the home interface, the complexity of software development is decreased, and has the advantage of increased debugging efficiency.
Table 4. LoC Comparison of Entity Beans
Items File Name LoC Note
EJB2.0 EJB3.0 EJB2.0 EJB3.0
MEMBER MemberBean.java MemberEntity.java 196 75 EJB2.0 : 221 EJB3.0 : 75 MemberRemote.java 14 MemberRemoteHome.java 11 BOARD BoardBean.java BoardEntity.java 190 73 EJB2.0 : 210 EJB3.0 : 73 BoardRemote.java 11 BoardRemoteHome.java 9 RESERV ReservBean.java ReservEntity.java 217 81 EJB2.0 : 241 EJB3.0 : 81 ReservRemote.java 12 ReservRemoteHome.java 12 REPLY ReplyBean.java ReplyEntity.java 186 57 EJB2.0 : 205 EJB3.0 : 57 ReplyRemote.java 8 ReplyRemoteHome.java 11 Total(Unit : Line) 877 286 591
4.3. Comparison of XML
EAR files include the JAR file for the enterprise been, the WAR file for web application programs, and the JAR file for application program clients. Each file contain an internal XML document file and the Java class file.
This XML file is known as the deployment descriptor, and has a declarative step for the enterprise beans. This deployment descriptor uses declarative information such as transaction processing, security processing and naming services, rather than a program code, to define the actions of the enterprise bean.
Table 5. XML Comparison of EJB 2.0 and EJB 3.0
Items DD EJB 2.0 EJB 3.0
EJB ejb-jar.xml BOARD 42 X MEMBER 42 REPLY 42 RESERV 42 persistance.xml X BOARD 12 MEMBER 12 REPLY 12 RESERV 12 WEB web.xml 13 13 jboss-web.xml 10 X
The comparison of the deployment descriptor of the pilot system of EJB 2.0 and EJB 3.0 environments is shown in Table 5. As shown in Table 5, the deployment descriptor which defines the actions of the enterprise bean, has simplified every bean in EJB 3.0 compared to EJB 2.0, and is written by the standard specifications, which is unrelated to the WAS vendors, to secure independence and productivity of software.
5. Conclusion
Even though new standard specifications of the EJB, which is known as the most successful model for big data distribution computing environment, are continuously being released, however, due to the requirement of long learning time and high complexity of standard specifications, there have been difficulties in applying new specifications to real situation.
Furthermore, the studies comparing the development productivity of the EJB software is limited to LoC analyses of limited portion of the specifications, and even with the introduction of new EJB specifications, there have been only limited specific performance indices and guidelines for evaluating the software productivity and attempting new projects.
In this study, a pilot project based on the specifications of EJB 2.0 and EJB 3.0 in the same platform was developed to propose performance index, and conducted quantitative analysis of the developed performance index for the EJB specifications to offer a guideline for objective research of software development productivity.
Further studies on the comparison of the software development productivity of EJB 2.0/3.0 and EJB 3.1, as well as on the comparison of the development productivity for each performance index and the open source platforms for each Java EE N-tire structures, need to be continuously pursued
6. References
[1] M.H. Lee, “A Design Business Tier by using MVC Design Patterns for Plant Information”, Journal of Korean Institute of Plant Engineering, Vol. 11(2), pp. 99-107, 2006.
[2] M.H. Lee, “Design and Implementation of Large Size Distributed Object Process Based EJB 3.0 Standardization”, Journal of Korean Institute of Plant Engineering, Vol. 13(2), pp. 51-58, 2008. [3] M.H. Lee and J.S. Han, “Comparison of Development Productivity of Spring 2.5 and EJB 3.0 with
Lightweight Container Architecture”, The Society of Digital Policy & Management, Vol. 10(3), pp. 137-142, 2012.
[4] B.G. Kim, “Enterprise Java Beans 3.0”, Game, 2006.
[5] H.Y. Cheon, S.J. Kim, “Learn WebLogic EJB”, Daerim, pp. 12-301, 2006.
[6] H.S. Chae, “Object Orented CBD Development Bible”, Hanbit Media, pp. 35-76, 2006.
[7] Debu Panda, Reza Rahman, and Derek Lane, “EJB 3 in Action”, Manning Publications Co., pp. 3-176, 2007.
[8] R. Monson-Haefel, B. Burke, “Enterprise JavaBeans 3.0”, O'Reilly, pp. 1-150, 2006. [9] Sun Microsystems, “Enterprise JavaBeans Specification, Version 2.0, Final Release”, 2001. [10]Sun Microsystems, “JSR220: Enterprise JavaBeans, Version 3.0, Final Release”, 2006.
